Nu Tireni · Evidence Series · Part 31 · Mandate Ledger 01
Who appoints the Waitangi representatives today?
The first five mandate-ledger entries expose the distinction we needed. The present Waitangi National Trust positions are real representative offices with identifiable whakapapa and historical connections. But the legal mechanism placing a person into those offices is appointment by the Board itself. The statutes reviewed do not require a hapū election, hapū ratification or proof that the office carries the original law-making authority of the 1835 signatory's communities.
Current governanceMandate ledgerSource controlled
The appointment rule is explicit
After the 2015 amendment, the Board was required to appoint separate representatives from the families of Hōne Heke, Maihi Kawiti, Tāmati Wāka Nene and Pōmare. Those appointments are made by a Board resolution at a specially called meeting and then confirmed at a subsequent Board meeting.
The general succession clause is equally important. When a representative position becomes vacant, the Board appoints a replacement whom the Board itself considers qualified for the particular representative position.
The current officeholders are public
The Waitangi Treaty Grounds' current leadership page identifies the present representatives. As at the page reviewed in September 2026, it lists David Rankin as a member of the family of Hōne Heke; Takoha Ropati as a member of the family of Maihi Kawiti; Mataroria Lyndon as a member of the family of Tāmati Wāka Nene; Kelvin Davis as a member of the family of Pōmare; and Hōne Tāmihana as the representative for Māori living in the North Island south of Auckland.
The same official page describes the Board as continuing to consist of descendants and representatives of people associated with the historic site. That description supports a representative and whakapapa function. It does not itself describe these offices as holders of inherited sovereign jurisdiction.
Mandate Ledger 01 — the five lines already intersecting the Trust
| 1835 rangatira | He Wakaputanga | Hapū / 1835 residence | Te Tiriti status | Later Waitangi office | Current holder shown by Trust | Mandate status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hōne Wiremu Heke Pōkai | No. 34; signed 28 Oct 1835 | Ngāpuhi; Te Matarahurahu, Ngāti Rāhiri, Ngāi Tāwake, Ngāti Tautahi, Te Uri-o-Hua; Kaikohe | Signed 6 Feb 1840 | 1932: included in combined Heke/Kawiti/Nene/Pōmare family position. 2015: separate Hōne Heke family position. | David Rankin | Representation provedDelegated jurisdiction not proved |
| Te Ruki Kawiti | No. 19; signed 28 Oct 1835 | Ngāpuhi, Ngāti Hine; Waiōmio | Signed in May 1840 | 1932: represented through the Maihi Kawiti family line in the combined position. 2015: separate Maihi Kawiti family position. | Takoha Ropati | Whakapapa link provedPolitical succession not proved |
| Tāmati Wāka Nene | No. 35; first codicil signatory, soon after 28 Oct 1835 | Ngāpuhi, Te Roroa, Ngāti Hao, Ngāti Miru, Ngāti Pou; Utakura | Signed 6 Feb 1840 | 1932: included in combined family position. 2015: separate Tāmati Wāka Nene family position. | Mataroria Lyndon | Family representation provedHapū mandate not located |
| Pōmare II | No. 23; signed 28 Oct 1835 | Ngāpuhi, Ngāti Manu; Ōtūihu | Signed 17 Feb 1840 | 1932: included in combined family position. 2015: separate Pōmare family position. | Kelvin Davis | Family representation provedNgāti Manu jurisdiction not shown as vested |
| Te Wherowhero / Pōtatau | No. 52; final signatory, 22 Jul 1839, through representative Kahawai | Waikato, Ngāti Mahuta; Waikato | Refused to sign Te Tiriti in 1840 | 1932: Te Rata Mahuta appointed for Māori living in the North Island south of Auckland. The position is strongly Kīngitanga-linked, but the deed describes the office territorially rather than as a hereditary King seat. | Hōne Tāmihana | Historical / Kīngitanga link strongConstitutional vesting not proved |
The Heke entry immediately disproves a simple hereditary-seat theory
Hōne Heke's two children died as infants. The present statutory position is therefore described as a member of the family of Hōne Heke, not as a direct hereditary succession from a surviving child of Heke.
That does not make the position illegitimate as a Trust office. It does show why we cannot infer constitutional succession merely from the existence of a family seat.
Kawiti gives us a different kind of chain
Kawiti had sons including Maihi Parāone Te Kuhanga Kawiti. The Waitangi deed did not name a “Te Ruki Kawiti seat”; it described a representative selected from the Hōne Heke, Maihi Kawiti, Tāmati Wāka Nene and Pōmare families. The modern statute then separated the Maihi Kawiti family into its own representative office.
That is evidence of deliberate preservation of a family line. The missing step remains the same: whether Ngāti Hine ever vested governmental jurisdiction in that Trust position.
Pōmare gives us one of the clearest contemporary sovereignty warnings
When Pōmare II was interviewed after signing Te Tiriti, an American naval officer recorded that Pōmare believed he had not surrendered sovereignty and could not do so alone because it belonged to all of his iwi.
Whatever weight is ultimately given to that account, it reinforces the precise mandate problem: if a rangatira himself understood authority as belonging beyond the individual officeholder, a later “family representative” cannot automatically be treated as owning that authority merely by appointment.
Te Wherowhero is different again
Te Wherowhero signed He Wakaputanga in July 1839 through his representative Kahawai and refused to sign Te Tiriti the following year. He later became Pōtatau, the first Māori King, in 1858 and was succeeded by his son Tāwhiao.
The 1932 Waitangi deed placed Te Rata Mahuta — Pōtatau's great-grandson and then Māori King — in the position representing Māori living south of Auckland. That is powerful evidence that Bledisloe and the founders deliberately placed a Kīngitanga figure into the Board architecture.
But the deed still defines the office by the population represented, not by saying “the Māori King”, “Ngāti Mahuta sovereign”, or “successor to Te Wherowhero's He Wakaputanga authority”. The current Trust page now lists Hōne Tāmihana in that territorial representative position. That is why the office must be analysed as a legal office separately from succession to the Kīngitanga throne.
The Board appointing its own representatives is the point we now need to investigate
The relevant family and territorial positions exist; the current holders are publicly identified; appointments are made through Board governance procedures.
No statutory provision reviewed says a hapū vote, whakapapa assembly, tikanga-based ratification or constitutional delegation is required before the Board appoints the representative.
The actual appointment records: nominations, Board resolutions, supporting whakapapa material, consultation records and any documents explaining why the Board considered each present holder qualified.
This is where a possible substitution can actually be tested
The evidence now allows a much more exact question than “are they usurping our rangatira?”
If the only instrument we can find is the Trust appointment, then the safe legal conclusion is representation within the Trust — not ownership of the hapū's constitutional authority.
If separate mandate documents exist, then those documents become the next evidential bridge and must be examined on their own terms.
Records now required
- The Board resolution appointing David Rankin to the Hōne Heke family position.
- The Board resolution appointing Takoha Ropati to the Maihi Kawiti family position.
- The Board resolution appointing Mataroria Lyndon to the Tāmati Wāka Nene family position.
- The Board resolution appointing Kelvin Davis to the Pōmare family position.
- The Board resolution appointing Hōne Tāmihana to the south-of-Auckland representative position.
- Any nomination papers, whakapapa evidence, consultation records or letters supporting each appointment.
- Any Board policy defining what “qualified for the particular representative position” means.
- Any hapū or iwi resolutions purporting to delegate political or constitutional authority to those positions.
Finding at this stage
Primary and official sources
NZHistory — He Wakaputanga signatory database ↗
NZHistory — Tāmati Wāka Nene ↗
Waitangi National Trust Board Act 1932 — current consolidated text ↗
Waitangi National Trust Board Amendment Act 2015 ↗
Waitangi Treaty Grounds — current leadership and trustee positions ↗